The secret formula to win in 2008
Thu Dec 07, 2006 at 07:51:54 AM PDT
Several years ago, I worked with another scientist (Eric Schulman) on an "empiric" formula to predict presidential elections. It was a joke, published in the Annals of Improbable Research Online.
However, it ended up being correct in the 2004 elections (and it was a retrospective "I told you so" for backers of Howard Dean or Wesley Clark.
http://members.verizon.net/...
The formula, and its implications for the current Presidential Cattle Call (and by extension, the downstream Congressional Races) below the fold ....
Warning: Obama fans will not be happy, but neither will most people
The formula is as follows:
Presidential Electability = 5*(years as President) + years as U.S. Representative + 11*(years as Governor),
+110 if the candidate has been a four- or five-star general officer in the United States Armed Forces,
+110 if the candidate has been a college or university president or chancellor,
+110 if the candidate is the child of a U.S. Senator,
–110 if the candidate has been divorced,
–110 if the candidate has been a special prosecutor,
–110 if the candidate was the first adherent of a particular religion (e.g., Protestantism, Deism, or Catholicism) to be a major-party candidate for President,
–110 if the candidate was an officer of a lobbying organization at the time of the election.
Vice Presidential Electability = 4*(years as Vice President) + years as U.S. Representative + years as Governor,
+110 if the candidate has been a corporate banker,
+110 if the candidate has been a college or university president or chancellor,
+110 if the candidate is the child of a U.S. Senator,
–110 if the candidate was the first adherent of a particular religion (e.g., Protestantism, Deism, Catholicism, or Judaism) to be a major-party candidate for Vice President,
–110 if the candidate was an officer of a lobbying organization at the time of the election.
Add the two together for the two major party tickets, and voila! You have a winner.
This formula was based on every election from Washington's first to Bush vs Gore.
It doesn't state who wins the popular vote or who ACTUALLY won the states fairly ... it states who wins, by hook or by crook.
The full details and every election result are at the website.
Now if you look at the current crop of Dems ... as listed in the straw poll ...
Edwards 28 15 8 7 8 12 10 7 7
Obama 28
Clark 26 17 15 15 22 26 34 35 34
H. Clinton 5 2 2 2 3 6 8 9 10
Richardson 4 2 1 2 3 5 3 4 4
Kerry 1 2 1 1 3 2 2 1 2
Bayh 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2
Vilsack 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Biden 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 3
Gravel 0
Dodd 0 0 0
Only Clark and Bayh are superstars (Bayh is a senator's son and a former governor. Richardson and Vilsack have a prayer. The rest are cannon fodder. Including Edwards and Obama.
I don't like Bayh either, although making him VP could be harmless. So, an Obama-Bayh ticket could be okay.
And the GOP isn't looking too good either. McCain is a divorced Senator. Giuliani is a twice-divorced former special prosecutor. Romney is a Mormon, and they've never been nominated to the Presidency on either party's ticket before. In fact, only Rice could do okay (former University provost, which is a stretch of the current rule listed above for University presidents) and she isn't getting nominated. Ditto for Jeb (although look out if he's ever nominated in the future).
So, as silly as it seems to follow something I devised as a prank, I'm supporting Clark. And if Edwards or Obama or any of the Senators comes out on top, I'm supporting a VP like Clark, Richardson, Vilsack, or god help us ... Bayh.
And I may even talk up Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, and McCain in mixed company.
Heck, if you REALLY want to cause trouble ... post this formula at Free Republic or Red State. I won't dare go there myself, but it could cause a great deal of discord.
Permalink | 21 comments